Professor Mabbutt asked that Session VI should attempt to
identify potential areas for co-operation with the UN University
under the research and training components of its Arid Lands
Sub-programme, and should incidentally attempt to crystallize the
previous discussions. There would be brief regional reports on
what were seen as fruitful areas for collaboration, but there
would also be opportunities to discuss interrelationships between
regions in particular subject areas.

In a joint report embodying experience from Chile and
Argentina, Drs Gastó and Braun suggested that there was in those
countries an adequate administrative structure to support
research, training, and extension for the arid zones, linked with
existing academic and research institutions in the area. Bearing
in mind that the University is not a development agency but works
for development through research and training programmes linked
with existing institutions, and considering its limited funds and
personnel, it would not appear justified to attempt to duplicate
existing facilities. It was stressed that solutions to arid lands
problems should be ecologically and socio-economically
appropriate to the conditions in which they were applied, and in
this respect local institutions might be able to offer
alternatives to development, with a common objective of improving
the quality of life in the arid zones.

They saw the following important areas in which the University
could associate with local centres of research and education:

-centralizing, coordinating, and stimulating the exchange
of information on arid lands within Latin America;

-improving communication with other areas, to add to the
common fund of knowledge on the drylands;

-supporting local research projects that had a general
significance;

-supporting graduate training programmes for the
development of the Latin American drylands;

-stimulating the formation of multidisciplinary research
teams, on a national and multinational scale.

In the discussion that followed, Professor Mabbutt asked that
participants should try to identify problem areas that could be
worked on in a framework such as had been proposed. Dr Smith
suggested that the UN University might support a
"model" project that could be applied in several
countries of Latin America; for example, conflicts where
resources are communally owned but subject to individual
exploitation.

Dr Correia noted that Brazil differed in its ethnic
composition from other Latin American countries, for it was
composed of blacks, whites, and mulattos in the main, the
indigenous population having been largely decimated.
Consequently, whilst Brazil shared interests with other countries
of Latin America, it also had common links with Africa, for
example with Angola.

He asked that the UN University should support academic
exchanges between Latin American specialists, and also with other
countries which have interests in arid lands studies, to enable
the more advanced in certain fields to share their experience
with the more backward. A large number of graduate students in
Brazil could benefit from such interchange. The University could
also support workshops in which could participate not only
scientists but a wide range of arid-zone inhabitants, from
peasants to government officials and including representatives of
private organizations involved in work in the drylands.

There were already many researchers in Brazil, both Brazilian
and foreign, but he would like to see support for
multidisciplinary research teams, involving members from
different institutions, working on problems such as the
transformation of the Sao Francisco River, its ecological impact
and social consequences. His own university, Pernambuco State
University, had a project under consideration for support from
the Ford Foundation, on natural resources problems in the area.

In reply, Dr Medellín suggested that Dr Correia had raised
topics in which the UN University might well be able to help,
but, despite the interesting reports received so far, there was a
lack of information on which the Workshop could come to firm
conclusions. They had heard of these projects only since arriving
at Saltillo.

Professor Mabbutt stressed that, although the University could
support existing general arrangements for research and
training-as through the award of Fellowships-its main activities
tended to be related to problem areas defined within its
programmes, and the theme of the Arid Lands Sub-programme was
"The Assessment of Obstacles to the Application of Existing
Knowledge in the Solution of Arid Lands Problems.'' To this end
it could associate with and strengthen an existing institution;
promote and support research; and assist the flow of information
through holding workshops and supporting visits by senior
scientists with a record of achievement. It could assist training
in the interests of its sub-programme, viewed in the widest
context, for graduate professionals engaged in the management and
development of arid lands, and for younger staff at educational
institutions who could benefit from study overseas. What was
needed from the Workshop was suitable themes about which such
reinforcing activities could be developed.

Speaking on the Mexican situation, Dr Nava stressed that, in
his view, education and training for arid lands development did
not have an adequate organizational basis. For this reason he
considered it important to establish a study group on the
application of technology in this area. The problem was one
calling not so much for major scientific discoveries as for a
knowledge of how to operate in creating a system for technology
transfer at various levels. The system should have continuity and
should be co-ordinated with social action within the existing
social system.

The two areas in which he would like the UN University to
support existing projects are:

-training in problems of technology transfer; and

-interdisciplinary research into ecosystem transformation,
for example of natural vegetation, the organization of
natural resources, and the application of existing knowledge
to these ends.

This would allow a development of effective extension
activities at the ejido level, since he saw the two areas as
being fundamental to arid lands management and development in
northern Mexico. Under organization of natural resources he
included study of the optimal organization of the elements
available to ejido members, such as fences, water points, and
sheds, to bring maximum sustained production. Alternative types
of management systems should be determined and their operation
studied, both in the ejidos and independently.

Sr Trueba commented that Dr Nava's proposals tended to centre
on natural resources problems, whereas the Workshop had
emphasized social problems in development, and the role of the
social sciences. In training, Nava had concentrated on the
university level, whereas training of the peasant landusers
should be incorporated into the programmes. Lastly, research in
the universities was oriented more towards the technological
aspects of productions than towards the social relationships
involved.

Dr Zavaleta described a basic investigation being undertaken
in Peru into one of the 54 catchments, that of the Cañete River,
crossing the coastal desert to the Pacific. The project aimed to
identify the problems of development and to define strategies to
overcome them. He suggested that the University could support a
multidisciplinary approach in this project, and use the results
towards the definition of arid lands problems elsewhere in Latin
America.

Dr Freeman Smith said that the Workshop had centred its
discussion on the problem of how to design research that would
assist technology transfer through an understanding of mechanisms
and obstacles. It was a subject that called for a
multidisciplinary approach, with integration of contributions
from the social and natural sciences. It was unrealistic to
expect the UN University to become involved in specific,
long-term research projects, but in his view it could contribute
to the development of a methodology on how to deal with problems
of and responses to technology transfer. On the basis of the
results obtained in such a study, one could group a number of
contributors in each country to carry out specific studies which
would further answers to the main questions of research design
and technology transfer.

Dr Schechter drew attention to a point made earlier by Dr
Gastó: in 30 years of arid-zone research we had made little
impact on those regions. The UN University could encourage
consideration of this key question, for it could be maintained
that the majority of heads of research institutions did not know
how to do relevant research, whilst the majority of heads of
development agencies did not know how to apply the results of
research. The problem was not specific to arid regions. By
encouraging study of it, the University could possibly contribute
information and experience to research directors and to those in
charge of development.

Application of research had a number of socioeconomic and
political aspects. We do not know enough about the interest of
social scientists in this area; both in the social and in the
natural sciences there is a need for better information and for
better access to information for an attack on the common problem.

Concerning studies suitable for seminars and research
projects, these could include the problem of management of
communal lands in the different countries of Latin America, such
as the ejidos in Mexico, on which a number of studies had been
made. We need an integration of social and ecological research in
the design of alternative technologies for such communities.

Dr Braun considered that there was scope for increased
productivity and an improvement of living standards through
ecosystem management in the systems of transhumance on the
eastern slopes of the Andes between 30° and 38°S. He suggested
that it would be worthwhile to study these systems, to carry out
an analysis of the bases of production, and to consider
alternatives.

Further discussion resulted in agreement on two fundamental
questions which the UN University sub-programme might seek to
answer through its sponsored activities in Latin America:

-How does one determine the relevance of current research
and existing knowledge to the problem of arid lands
development?

-How does one identify, with arid lands communities, those
endemic mechanisms for social change with which science and
technology must link in the interests of development and
improved living standards?

The answers to both involved the social scientist centrally,
working in collaboration with the ecologist and agricultural
scientist, and were fundamental to the design and transfer of
technology.

Summing up, Professor Mabbutt stated that the Workshop had
stressed an approach that should begin with identification of the
perceived needs and aspirations of the arid lands communities
involved, and then consider the relevance of existing knowledge
and proposed technology to these. Research should also identify
the potential for change within the community and the endemic
processes involved, with which science and technology must link
for participatory development. Finally, there remained the
obstacles to such linkage. These might rest in the irrelevance of
knowledge and technology to the local circumstances of production
or to community aims; in administrative breakdown; in the
unavailability of the necessary inputs; in lack of training or
communication, or in a host of other factors, some operating from
outside the community concerned. Attention should be given to
criteria of success or failure, which differed between
institutions.

Discussion had endorsed a multidisciplinary approach, with an
important role for the social scientist in collaboration with
ecologists, agricultural scientists, and other colleagues. Given
the theme of the sub-programme and the timing of its operations,
it was likely that emphasis would be placed on case studies which
could analyse experience in research, extension, and development
in relation to existing conditions in the drylands, their
management problems and development prospects. The objective
might be the establishment of methodological guidelines for
research and training in the service of development for improved
living conditions and environmental rehabilitation.

It was, perhaps, premature to identify specific topics for
investigation at this stage, although several possibilities had
been mentioned at the Workshop. What seemed appropriate was the
enlistment of regional groups which could be provided with terms
of reference to assist them in identifying appropriate topics for
investigation. These discussions should draw on experience from a
wide field, including peasant organizations, development
agencies, social workers, extension services, etc., as well as
the universities.

On behalf of the United Nations University, the organizers,
and the participants, Professor Mabbutt once again thanked Dr
Nava and his colleagues for the excellent arrangements, the
administrative support, and the kind hospitality which had helped
to make the important personal contacts and which had contributed
to the friendly atmosphere and co-operative spirit of the
Workshop. He also thanked the chairmen and rapporteurs of the
various sessions for their support in keeping the Workshop on
course and maintaining the record of its discussions. Lastly, he
thanked the participants for their contributions towards the
objectives of the Workshop. With goodwill and much informal
assistance, which he gratefully acknowledged, difficulties of
language had been overcome. Thanks to a fine team spirit the
Workshop had usefully pointed the way for extension in Latin
America of the activities of the United Nations University under
its Arid Lands Sub-programme.